Obama on Ayers: 'I assumed that he had been rehabilitated'

[Shady]

Obama on Ayers: 'I assumed that he had been rehabilitated'

In an interview with the sympathetic conservative talk radio host this afternoon, Obama offered the clearest explanation yet of how an extremely careful politician allowed himself anywhere near a former '60s radical who would become a Republican target in this year's presidential campaign.

Obama "had assumed" from Bill Ayers' stature in Chicago, he told the Philadelphia-based Michael Smerconish, that Ayers had been "rehabilitated" since his 1960s crimes.

Politico

Yeah Barack, the same way Timothy McVeigh was rehabilitated! Probably under the Government Rehabilitation of Domestic Terrorists Act. Seriously, I'm beginning to think that Barack Obama is either mentally retarded, or so dumb and naive, he shouldn't be anywhere near the White House, let alone actually reside there. His pseudo-hope and change act is wearing way thin.

[BubberMiley]

So you think Chicago schools should have been left to rot because one of the people working for them was a jerk 40 years ago?

You must be getting angry that the more the Ayers "controversy" is talked about, the higher Obama's polls go. Have you screamed "Kill Him" at McCain rally yet?

[stevoh]

Obama on Ayers: 'I assumed that he had been rehabilitated'

In an interview with the sympathetic conservative talk radio host this afternoon, Obama offered the clearest explanation yet of how an extremely careful politician allowed himself anywhere near a former '60s radical who would become a Republican target in this year's presidential campaign.

Obama "had assumed" from Bill Ayers' stature in Chicago, he told the Philadelphia-based Michael Smerconish, that Ayers had been "rehabilitated" since his 1960s crimes.

Politico

Yeah Barack, the same way Timothy McVeigh was rehabilitated! Probably under the Government Rehabilitation of Domestic Terrorists Act. Seriously, I'm beginning to think that Barack Obama is either mentally retarded, or so dumb and naive, he shouldn't be anywhere near the White House, let alone actually reside there. His pseudo-hope and change act is wearing way thin.

Good article, presented the information clearly. We need to remember three things:

1. Obama was 8 when the acts were being committed (so in no way could condone or participate).

2. Obama met Ayers under the following circumstances:

The gentleman in question, Bill Ayers, is a college professor, teaches education at the University of Illinois," he said. "That's how i met him -- working on a school reform project that was funded by an ambassador and very close friend of Ronald Reagan's" along with "a bunch of conservative businessmen and civic leaders."

I can see how meeting this person in these circumstances, and who was pursuing a noble cause (school reform) would lead you to believe he was above board.

3. It wasn't until 2001 when his memoir was published that the true extent of Ayers crimes was revealed.

It wasn't just that Obama didn't know exactly what Ayers was and wasn't responsible for at the time, and so couldn't pass judgement, its that NO-ONE did. He was never convicted, and until his memoirs were published, no-one knew the details.

And there are verified reports of conservatives working just as closely with Ayers on these worthy community projects as Obama did. Are they terrorists too?

[Shady]

So you think Chicago schools should have been left to rot because one of the people working for them was a jerk 40 years ago?

No, but whether Chicago schools should "rot" has little to do with people like Bill Ayers. The American education system has been run by liberals for 50 years. American's spend more money per student than any other country in the world. And what progress has been made?

[Topaz]

I'm surprised the Dems haven't come out and asked about the friendship between the Bush's and the Binladen's or the Royal Family of saudia arabia, McCain party leader! Or if you really want to get dirty, how about the Bush's grfather and association with Hilter through banking??? There's more in the closet of the Cons party president than you can find on Obama.

[Shady]

I'm surprised the Dems haven't come out and asked about the friendship between the Bush's and the Binladen's

The Bin Laden's? Please, do tell.

[BubberMiley]

No, but whether Chicago schools should "rot" has little to do with people like Bill Ayers. The American education system has been run by liberals for 50 years. American's spend more money per student than any other country in the world. And what progress has been made?

So your point is that Obama should not have worked for Chicago schools because Ayers was also involved or that too much money is spent on public education for too little result?

That's the problem with tenuous character assassination by association. The arguments go off the rails as soon as they're challenged.

Edited October 10, 2008 by BubberMiley

[BubberMiley]

The Bin Laden's? Please, do tell.

You don't even know about that? Check out who George Bush Sr was meeting with on 9/11 for starters.

[Shady]

You don't even know about that? Check out who George Bush Sr was meeting with on 9/11 for starters.

Who was George Bush Sr meeting with on 9/11? Enlighten us all. Please.

[sharkman]

I'm surprised the Dems haven't come out and asked about the friendship between the Bush's and the Binladen's or the Royal Family of saudia arabia, McCain party leader! Or if you really want to get dirty, how about the Bush's grfather and association with Hilter through banking??? There's more in the closet of the Cons party president than you can find on Obama.

What rock have you been under? The Dems have scoured and searched every rumour let alone the ones you've mentioned. As hard as they try, they've found nothing to impeach Bush on. I hear bush planned 9/11.

[BubberMiley]

Who was George Bush Sr meeting with on 9/11? Enlighten us all. Please.

Bin laden's brother, Jerome. It's well documented and largely considered to have been a coincidence, but it's the truth nonetheless.

[GostHacked]

No, but whether Chicago schools should "rot" has little to do with people like Bill Ayers. The American education system has been run by liberals for 50 years. American's spend more money per student than any other country in the world. And what progress has been made?

And the US spends more on the military than education.... do you call this progress? And why are so many children being left behind?

[bush_cheney2004]

And the US spends more on the military than education.... do you call this progress? And why are so many children being left behind?

This is patently false....as spending on education exceeds defense for federal, state, and local government.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/index.php

[Guest American Woman]

QUOTE=GostHacked: And the US spends more on the military than education.... do you call this progress? And why are so many children being left behind?

This is patently false....as spending on education exceeds defense for federal, state, and local government.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/index.php

No, it's not patently false since the Defense budget doesn't include military-related expenses that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance and production, Veterans Affairs, or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (which are largely funded through extra-budgetary supplements).

....hardly anyone appreciates that the total amount of all defense-related spending greatly exceeds the amount budgeted for the Department of Defense. Indeed, it is roughly almost twice as large.

link

link

[bush_cheney2004]

No, it's not patently false since the Defense budget doesn't include military-related expenses that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance and production, Veterans Affairs, or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (which are largely funded through extra-budgetary supplements).

Sorry, but you already lost this argument months ago. If you want to try the shell game again, then you must also parse defense spending to include education (e.g. GI Bill, ROTC, military schools, college funding, etc.). Moreover, if one looks at prior fiscal years, the gap is even larger.

Spending for Iraq and Afganistan are also not exclusively military.

[Guest American Woman]

Sorry, but you already lost this argument months ago. If you want to try the shell game again, then you must also parse defense spending to include education (e.g. GI Bill, ROTC, military schools, college funding, etc.). Moreover, if one looks at prior fiscal years, the gap is even larger.

Spending for Iraq and Afganistan are also not exclusively military.

Keep telling yourself that and then maybe you'll believe it, but the rest of us won't.

Edited October 11, 2008 by American Woman

[bush_cheney2004]

Keep telling yourself that and maybe you'll believe it, but the rest of us won't.

That's as good as saying "Uncle"....you are now 0-2 on "defense spending".

Spending trend for total education and defense:

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/downch...e=&state=US

Edited October 11, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest American Woman]

That's as good as saying "Uncle"....you are now 0-2 on "defense spending".

Keep telling yourself that and then maybe you'll believe that, too, but the rest of us won't.

[bush_cheney2004]

Keep telling yourself that and then maybe you'll believe that, too, but the rest of us won't.

You are now 2-0 for repeated posts.

[WIP]

For anyone old enough to remember the 60's, the antiwar radicals were a tempest in a teapot compared to the modern phenomena of terrorism. We had a worse case of terrorist revolutionaries in Quebec, when the FLQ moved from putting letter bombs in postal boxes to kidnapping politicians; and even they were ridiculously blown out of proportion so that the Trudeau Government had an excuse to invoke the War Measures Act.

The word "terrorist" was never used to describe the "Chicago Seven," the Yippies, the Weather Underground, or the Black Panthers. They were called revolutionaries, seditionists, and radicals, but I don't recall hearing the word terrorist until the Palestinian PFLP guerillas invaded the Olympic compound in Munich back in 1972 and held the Israeli athletes hostage!

The reason it is being used now, and in association with Bill Ayers, is because it is a loaded word in the minds of most people, and combined with a mixed race candidate who has an Arab middle name, it is an obvious emotional ploy to lead people to vote against their own economic interests because they fear the Democratic candidate is "unAmerican!"

Honestly, how many times can they pull off this bullshit. Bill Clinton was unAmerican because he hid out at Oxford during the Vietnam War, as opposed to joining the National Guard like Republican chickenhawks did; John Kerry was unAmerican because he could speak French and accused his fellow soldiers of committing atrocities against Vietnamese civilians when he came back from the War, Dukakis was unAmerican because he was a member of the ACLU and opposed George HW Bush's plan to create an amendment that would make it a crime to burn the American Flag.

The only one who couldn't be framed as unAmerican it seems was Al Gore -- he was just too white bread for this line of attack; but instead they were able to go after his move to the Left and run against Clinton's own centrist policies. So that would make it the only presidential race in the last 20 years that was fought primarily over issues!